Finalist for judge says he didn't mean to hide interest in job

A finalist for an open spot on MIlwaukee's circuit court bench says he never expected his name to be withheld when he first applied.

In announcing the initial applicant pool, a Gov. Scott Walker spokesman said four of the 10 applicants asked that their names be kept confidential. Gilbert Urfer was one of the four not revealed until he was named a finalist.

Urfer, a Brookfield lawyer and former prosecutor, responded to a Proof & Hearsay post that suggested anyone applying for a judicial appointment should be willing to own up to those aspirations. He said he was only concerned that the entire, extensive application would be public, and asked that some of those details be withheld, not his name.

"It is the same reason I don’t list my phone number," Urfer wrote. "I simply requested that, to the extent allowed by applicable law, the committee keep my application confidential. I actually assumed that my name and the fact that I had applied would be public knowledge and I was a bit surprised when the first story said that I asked for my name to be withheld."

Other readers supported secrecy of applications, commenting that merely expressing interest in a judicial appointment would automatically cause problems with the applicant's current employer.

That doesn't explain why another finalist, Christopher Lipscomb, asked not to listed at the application stage. He works for his own firm, and a municipal judge, and everyone knows he wants to be a circuit judge; he ran for election twice.

But another commenter sees the value of full disclosure:

Releasing the names of the applicants should enable the public to determine whether the selection committee chose the best applicant, or whether cronyism/favoritism was at play.

Besides, not authorizing release of one's own name implies that the candidate has some doubt as to whether s/he is the most qualified applicant for the position. I'm not sure that I would want to appear before a judge who (apparently) has self-esteem issues.

INTERACTIVE: This interactive provides a detailed look at the current term of the U.S. Supreme Court, including summaries of major cases, profiles of the justices, and legal alignments based on past decisions.